tv [untitled] February 28, 2012 10:30am-11:00am PST
consider here is transparency. that is to get as many allies on the system, and the things that calculate the votes, as is possible. this is missing entirely with proprietary-owned vendor operating software systems. essentially, software is proprietary in protected by all manner of rights and secrecy, so nobody gets eyes on it, really. even if it is open, there is a considerable amount of the scientific community that can look at the software code. they will object to looking at it, because of the legal liabilities associated with having looked at the proprietary software, and and creating something subsequently, and running into a problem of being accused of taking the software that may have looked at, using it to develop something new. in the report, you will note that what we recommend is a
publicly owned open-source software system with mandatory printed ballots. the reason this is important is because this gives you the opportunity to have the largest amount of is on the software that calculates the vote, as well as reaching the best possibility of securing a voter intend, because that is important, if a voter is confused by the ballot this side, if a voter is confused by the process. necessarily, the voter's intent can be at risk. "we are talking about here is a security issue. two of them. one of them is the security issue associated with no one knowing what the big black box does. the other is understanding of that a broker wants to know that when they voted for one person,
that is the vote that is counted them with. thank you for listening. chairperson campos: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is brad turner. good to see you. today, i wanted to hand in a statement i typed up, giving some background on how we got here, and the basic overall. i think many of you know in the democratic state platform, with the good help of christine pelosi, we advised open source systems with mandatory paper ballots, similar to what was just described. we want you to know the ranked choice but to an issue is not the main focus of the election reform community, but it has become an issue, because at this point we are still not obtaining better security within
the voting systems. that, in our opinion, is the job at hand, to make sure we have better election systems. people like allen becker, royce altman, the fellow that wrote the certification process for the federal government. it is pretty much concluded that the current systems are not appropriate. the question is where we go from here. this conversation seems to have been in the direction of talking about ballot design issues, and whether it is prudent to have an instant runoff rather than a follow-up runoff. i think those are interesting questions, and some of them are philosophical. my point today is to say i think we are good with the current ballot design. what we really need to do is focus on the election systems. it should be stated that the ranked joyce algorithms and software additions -- they
create an extra muddling of the current systems that are already concluded by the review of the secretary of state to be inappropriate. we are a little bit ahead of ourselves, talking about ballot redesign. just to be also noted, the open source systems we advocate can handle ranked joyce voting. -- ranked choice of voting. we want the security aspects to be highlighted continually. that is why i am here today. i brought a handout that might give you some background. chairperson campos: thank you, mr. turner. next speaker, please. >> i live in know we valley -- noe valley. i have been studying different voting systems for about 5.5 years. as you know, i have brought up issues of score voting and
approval voting in the past. one reason i think these systems are really interesting is some inherent properties make them simpler for voters and the department of elections. with approval voting, you are using an ordinary ballot. the only change is to count over votes. you do not discard them. if i want to vote for five candidates, i can do that. it is hard for voters to get confused. it is almost impossible to spoil your ballot. in experiments including looking at really contentious political elections, it turns out you get about 1/5 as many spoiled ballots. whereas with ranked joyce, ballot spoils have not been a major concern, but it has been seven times as many. one slightly more expressive form of voting is score voting, where you rate cadets on a scale of 0 to 4.
on its surface, it looks more complex, but it is simpler. it is ok to give two can it's the same score. with rent ballots, you cannot give two candid it's the same rating. there is a simple additive some. -- sum. you can do it on a normal machine. also, they have a property of being additive, so you can take precinct sub totals and add them together to get the final result. you do not have to transport all the bells to city hall, if you do not want to. ranked choice voting is unique. you have to essentially count all the ballots, because it is possible for a candidate to win at every single precinct, but when you some the dallas
together, somebody else wins. i find one litmus test is if you talk to a voter and describe the system briefly and then ask them to explain it to you -- that is a good indication of the simplicity of the system, if it is intuitive. most people are familiar with yelp ratings. they tend to assume you are adding up the points. whereas with rent-choice voting, if i talked to the average person and say, "describe the other rhythm," -- algorythm," people think it is weighted. they cannot explain the system. >> good afternoon again. eric burke, san francisco green
party and the local group our city. thank you for studying this issue. i do find it a little unfortunate that advocates improve the voting systems like ninth choice and others being presented by members of the public would be at odds with each other on this stuff. i think once we gets done -- once we get done studying it, as we evolve through the way we study voting systems, we can get better. ranked joyce has been in place in many places, including other countries. it has been shown to be effective. i personally follow every election very carefully, and have never seen anything alarming about ranked choice which made me think the person who was best for that community and who they desired to vote for was not being put in office. it looks to me like it is a system that works but could be improved. i think that is where we need
to head with this. to some extent, like what is being proposed by some of the other advocates, if we had a rented choice system in which folks could rank all of their candidates in the election with little bauble dots -- you have seen the chart from steven hill. by the way, if you are not talking to steven hill yet, please do. he is the granddaddy of ranked joyce in san francisco. this does not have to be complicated. if somebody came up to me and asked what an algorithm was for the voting system, i would not have a good answer either. i understand what an algorithm is. i think we can all work together on this. eventually, 20 years down the line, we can optimize our voting system to be incredible. right now, we have a pretty decent ranked joyce -- ranked
choice option. let us improve the system. as we project what is likely to happen in the future, let us look at what will allow us to place more than one choices on the ballot. that will make a major improvement in our ability to make ranked choice much easier for voters to use, because it would give them a chance to write everything i like, and not just two or three candidates. let us make sure we do not drop the ball in getting rid of the campaign financing problems. let us make sure we solve that. that directly messes with french
choice as well. -- with ranked choice as well. chairperson campos: public comment is closed. any other questions for mr. fried? if not, thank you for your work. we look forward to continuing to hear from you and get updates. hopefully, you can get any relevant information from some of the folks who spoke. thank you very much. if we can have this matter continued to the call of the chair -- a motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner mar. call item no. 5, please. >> item number 5, goals and objectives for 2012. chairperson campos: ms. miller? >> nancy miller, your interim executive officer. there is a short memo before you to remind you that lafco has the power to conduct special studies.
while we tend to get focused on cca and some of the other issues, the point of this is just to remind you that you have the power. if there are issues or other services that you want to direct us to explore, that is really our purpose. this item was put on to the direction of the chair, to remind you this is a power to conduct studies of municipal services solely by lafco. chairperson campos: to add to that, besides community choice aggregation, in the last year or so, we have looked at the issue of garbage disposal and transportation. we also now are looking at the issue of voting. if there are any other issues that you think this commission could look that, we have the opportunity to do that. that is not something we have to do our decide today. but we wanted to make sure we
reminded you of that opportunity. supervisor avalos: thank you. i appreciate the reminder about what lafco can do, in terms of research. i think i might want to look at, not just for today -- i will just broach the suspect -- broach the subject. i am looking at municipal banking in san francisco, and how we might be able to use the power of research and study with lafco to look into what ways we can enact and support san francisco. the treasurer has talked about doing these grants to local credit unions and local community development financial institutions, about $250,000 to support projects they work on. i think that would be something worth looking at. we can go offline and talk about
how to engage that. we have in terms that are also interested in working on that. perhaps we can study the scope of work we can do through lafco. chairperson campos: thank you, commissioner avalos. supervisor mar: i wanted to say i strongly support research in that area as well, looking at municipal banks in other jurisdictions, statewide and local jurisdictions, and how they have managed to control municipal banking institutions as well. chairperson campos: i want to echo that as well. i think it is a great idea. beginning a preliminary discussion of that topic, also keep in mind that not only do we have the benefit of having lafco staff look into that issue, but, to the extent that there may be a need to have an outside
expert that has specific expertise in the area, we also have the ability to retain that, if that is inappropriate step to take. we have that ability. and i trust that we will hear from commissioner avakis ab -- avalos and mr. fried, if we get to that point. unless there is a question from staff, why don't we open it up to public comment? >> good afternoon one more time, commissioners. san francisco green party and our city. definitely want to step up and time in in strong support of studying what it would take to create a municipal bank a and/or potentially regional bank. lafco is all about regional municipality relationships. it can be a really powerful opportunity for the bay area, in
consultation with occupy, to get some great stuff to happen with municipal banking. it is a great idea to put some city funds into credit unions instead of big wall street banks, and community banks. however, those credit unions and banks are still somewhat at the mercy, because of their size and where they invest, to investing in a market that is still doing the stuff that we would want to try to get our banking away from. yes, credit unions and local banks are great. but a true government-owned municipal bank, to me and to the green party, is definitely crucial. we need to make that happen. i want to time in one more time, since we have another commissioner who has not been here recently. we have got to get -- hopefully, right around the time that clean power sf gets approved in the
sfpuc, which will probably be sometime in the fall, we really need to get on city-wide broadband municipal fiber-optic. that also dovetails with the smart grid we are going to need for community choice aggregation for clean power sf. i want to say that one more time to make sure that is in the queue for the end of the year. chairperson campos: thank you. is there any other member of the public would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, if we can continue this item to the call of the chair, we will bring this item back as the need may arise. we have a motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner pimintel. >> item 6, executive officer's report.
>> form 700's are done -- are due, and we will be in contact to make sure those are on file. chairperson campos: any member of the public who would like to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> item 7, public comment. chairperson campos: this is an opportunity for any member of the public to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of the local agency formation commission that is not otherwise on the agenda. seeing none, a public comment is closed. >> item 8, future agenda items. chairperson campos: colleagues, do we have any other future agenda items? i know we have covered some new subject areas for us to focus. is there a member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. call the last item. >> item number 9, adjournment. chairperson campos: meeting adjourned.
thank you very much. çççç>> want to welcome you . of course, we have former mayor willie brown joining us. we have former supervisor sophie maxwell here as well. we have charlotte, a protocol officer. we have all the members of our board of supervisors, our current board. we have naomi's . harlon, kelly, the kids are here. naomi's mom is here bang today. thank you for being here as
well. mrs. lee is here. [laughter] >> yeah. >> of all, today has been a very active day of the just wonderful announcements, of decisions being made that really reflected the values of the city. i have another one that reflects the value of this city, someone that i have spent privileged to work with for so many years, one began her career as a special assistant, worked her way up as the purchaser, director of purchasing. before that, one of the most difficult task, kind of reminds me of my dpw day is, she had a difficult task of being the director of the taxicab administration. [laughter] so she has earned some strides there. going on to director of purchasing and becoming deputy
city administrator. most recently, and acting city administrator. and now my nominee for city administrator for the next five years, naomi lelly. -- kellyl. [cheers and applause] ayman >> to first and foremost to thank her family who have been part of her life. throughout this time, she even raised a family and keep harlon and kelly out of trouble. [laughter] but also, i want to especially thank the whole board of supervisors for just now voting unanimously to confirm her appointment. [ears and applause --years and
applause] they have seen in her the leadership, integrity, putting forth that verse communities of san francisco first, all the time, making good decisions, working in our communities to lift up everybody and to find those rays of hope. she has never been about herself. she has been about everybody else. whether it has been her family or helping several layers of, including me, adopt the right engine thct or keeping is very focused on what we need to do to make sure the city is administered well, she has been in there and she has done that. she is extremely qualified for this job. and she is one that i have interested for some time now to help me get out those jobs for people who are struggling, to find those business
opportunities, people who did not have those opportunities, to focus on a community that had raised their voice to ask for help from this city for so many decades. she has been there. she has been there is part of the city family, but she has also been there as our own advocate, advocating for people to be a part of the city in some anyways. and it has been difficult. it is the one we recognized during the month of february, black history month. it is appropriate at this time. and it is also appropriate that we recognize her appointment as part of a history of new appointments. because it is not lost on us that during the month that we celebrate black history, not only the history, but we celebrate soç much of opportuny that we haveçç in it the cityo join in with everybody else,çç
african-american city administrator in the city. çççç[mççççcheersç çç] ÷-c8attorney for joining us as . çu!;ççit is the whole city ft recognizes the ra(ortance of this. ççso,çççç withoutç furthe mu$ey know naomiç get to work right away. çzççwe all [laug&ter] the businessçç done it for everybody. fos0theççç moment,yçççi]ç the requirement of being sworn inç before this is fulfilled,t it is one that i fully enjoy t(ççdoingçç in the presencer
willie brown and people who have helped naomi in her first career, her family and friends. it is my privilege to swear in ms. naomi kelly. raise your right hand and repeat after me. i --is a solemn lease where -- that i support and defend -- the constitution of the united states and the constitution that against allçw3ççfáçççç ea domestic -- u!çthat iççç wir trueçççççç faith and alleo the constitution of theççççd çççstates and the constitutif çççsthte ofç california -- t çççsthisçw3 obalifornia -- t
or purpose of evasion -- and that i will well and faithfully discharge --q which i am about to enter -- s i hold the office of -- ççóçççcity admi for theççç;ççóçç city andn ççç[cheers and applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, history in our city is being made again, welcome the new city administrator, naomi kelly. [applause] >> thank you. w3ççñrççthank you, mr. mayof supervisors, members of the community, colleagues, and
friends. i am very pleased to deliver my first remarks as your new city administrator. [applause] t(çççççthis has beenççxd. earlier today,ç i am sure you heard t, downxdç proposition 8,çç and affirming judgeççç walker's decisiní. [applause] in their ruling, the court started out that proposition 8 served no purpose and had no effect other than to lessen the statusç of gays and lesbians in çcalifornia. this really does not have come atç a battered time as we celebrate black history month çand the civil rights movement- i]and this cannot have come at a better time. as we celebrate meeting the first african-american city administrator in san francisco. [applause] as many of you know, i hold maya
angelou's words to heart. members of the means rich tapestry, and all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value. special thanks to my husband. >> whoa. [laughter] [applause] he has >> been my biggest tavon, along with my mother, my sons, my family. antiwhite to mayer brown, whose job potential in me when i was right -- and thank you to mayer brown, who saw potential in me right out of college. i would like to thank allçççu have assembdee hereççç raisee from the beginning of my career to this juncture. you supported me. you shared with me, you laugh with me, you stood by me. and because of you, and i am committedç long ago today whats right and defied the goodçq forç the city of san francisco. çtogether weç have plenty ofxk ahead of us, and i humbly ask